Thursday, December 28, 2006

Marc Burkhardt has an interesting post about designers opting for existing art over newly commissioned art. I don't think you can underestimate the effect that education has on this issue. Design students use the resources they have available to them, which is anything they can download. They create their own imagery using bits and pieces they find off the web and it looks polished. When I see the senior shows around town I am amazed how clean and professional all the design work looks next to the illustration students' work. Painting takes time to do well, lots of time -- usually a few more years than kids are in school for. The designers aren't more talented, hard working, or smarter than the illustration students, but at a glance you might think so. Designers aren't taught, or encouraged, to work with the illustrators in school so why would it occur to them to hire an illustrator once they are out of school? Sadly, they miss the excitement that collaboration brings, the possibility that two minds working on a problem might answer it better than one, and the impact that a truly unique and tailored package can have.

20 comments:

You know, that was one of my gripes with art school, actually. There was very little overlap between class groups for illustrators, art directors and plain old graphic designers. As you can imagine, there was also very little incentive for us to look for and work with illustrators. This cut all ways– it was 'frowned upon' for a) designers to illustrate (although some of us -not me!- were rather good), b)illustrators to design (specifically, to work with type, for example), c) or art directors to do anything other than advertising.

I think that my education suffered from not being able to collaborate easily with my colleagues in this way, and while it's certainly easier (sometimes) to go online and hunt down appropriate imagery, I have to agree 100% Irene: you lose some of the magic that can happen when a good Designer and Illustrator get together to create something unique.

That is exactly what I saw in college. If I return to my former Academy I never ever see illustration being used in the work of the graphic designers. Always photography. And that is weird... Surem it takes less time to make a photo than to make an illustration but graphic designers should know like no other what an illustration can do and can't do...

Graphic designers of today are just plain lazy if you ask me. And it worries me because they are my future clients.The Academy I studied illustration also shut down the illustration department. Well... not 'shutting down' completely but it is impossible now to get a degree in illustration there. 'Illustration is a part of graphic design' was the motivation. Absolute nonsense! The head of department was a photographer pur sang. If illustration is a part of graphic design than so is photography. But I would never place it there because it is a medium (read: language) of its own. And so is illustration. People who place illustration in the category of graphic design have no idea what illustration is about.

Irene, your post resonates with me as I am sure many fellow illutrators. There is certainly a disconnect between graphic design and illustration at the 2 schools where I have taught. Although I think the problem has been there to some degree for a long time, the disconnect has become vastly worse because of what computer technology has done to the work ethic of both graphic design and illustration students. As you say, it takes a long time to learn how to paint and draw well. There is no getting around the fact that today we live in a culture of instant gratification. Representational art and illustration takes a certain amount of time to learn and it takes time to do it in practice. The ability to download and modify images (setting aside the issue of copyright for the moment) plays into that for those who are in position to commision images-and those who want to earn how to make good images themselves are less willing to make the massive effort and sacrifice it takes to get to the professional level. Almost all students I see today are reluctant to seek out any knowledge they can't get online. If they need a piece of reference, they look online. It's just lazieness, and it shows.When I see something like the ADC poster (the point of origination for Mark's original post at Drawger) I just am stupified by the disconnect between art direction and imagery. But when I pick myself off the floor, I remember that there have always been some individuals who practice art direction with an understanding of more than just getting through the day, but who are committed to doing the best work for their clients, and that means understanding the process and use of the resources available to them; photography, illustration, typography, etc. Like so many things today, though, they probably have to seek out that knowledge on their own. There are still people like that out there, and as long as there are, illustration marches on.

Hi Irene,I certainly understand the misunderstanding between illustrators and graphic designers. When I went to the Art Institute of Atlanta in the early 90's, all the "visual communication" students were lumped together in the same classes. After a certain point, I believe a few semesters, each student chose either the graphic design or illustration path. At that point the school drew a line in the sand and made it more difficult for the two to collaborate.

I chose illustration and took extra classes in graphic design to cover my bases once I graduated. I then spent the next ten+ years as a graphic designer with only minimal professional work as an illustrator. Unfortunately, it's difficult to get work as an illustrator and much easier to make a living as a graphic designer. While working as a graphic designer I did my best to incorporate as much illustration as possible into my work, but in general, timelines and budgets didn't allow for it. In this day and age of instant gratification clients rarely want to take the time to commission an illustrator or photographer. It's sad but it's a sign of the times. It's become so easy to search, quickly download stock photography, and then put together a comp that it's practically impossible to convince a client that commissioning an illustrator on the hopes they'll hit the mark is a good idea.

So how is the problem rectified? I'm not sure and I doubt I'm that qualified to answer it, but I'll take a stab. First it should start in the schools. The curriculum needs to be changed to incorporate more collaboration between not only graphic designers and illustrators but graphic designers and photographers as well. The schools need a significant amount of class time that focus on the business side of illustration and graphic design. It's great that designers are taught design principals but what about the business side of the job. That generally takes up more time in the day to day graphic design job than "being creative" does. Teach them how to run a business, how to communicate with a client, how to hire and budget for illustrators and photographers. This may at least give them an inkling of how to work with an illustrator and also sell the idea of newly commissioned art to the client.

Second, I believe there needs to be more talk in the graphic design industry about the subject. If there were an occasional article in Communication Arts or How maybe it would educate a few more designers. So many young designers strive to make it in the competitions and annuals of these publications but it's not going to happen using stock.

Interesting. I'm glad so many people have come out and talked about this; For the most part, I never found much traction for this type of conversation at art school- with certain exceptions.

Tony, your post put me in mind of a conversation that I had with a teacher once, where we discussed the possibility that art education is going at it all wrong, by adhering to the academic system. We discussed the alternative of art education as a combination between academic learning and a sort of apprentice/master structure. We thought this might be interesting (problems of supply-demand, accreditation or accountability notwithstanding) precisely because most designers, illustrators, photographers, etc. have to learn to become businesspeople as well, and we found art school to be sorely lacking in the appropriate curriculae (did I just make this word up?). This led to 'sketches' for a very interesting community space, but that's a completely different topic.

That being said, I do think institutions are aware of this problem. My last year in art school, the department head taught a class entitled "The business of Illustration", or something to that effect. I couldn't take it, because of scheduling conflicts, but I have a couple of friends who did. From what they told me, it was a good overview of the major points for going at it alone: taxes, health insurance, standards & practices, how to talk to a client, etc. Now, I don't think one semester course is enough to a) gain enough information or b) instill proper practices as habit in the student. But it's a start, I guess.

It certainly _seems_ like it should be easy enough to have design and illustration students working together on the same project, but I once talked to an FIT professor about it and he said that it worked out horribly.He said that the designers became little tyrants. We didn't have tim to discuss it further, but I'd love to hear any other expierences with such a project.

As for a business class, I couldn't agree more. It's hugely important and it really shouldn't be relegated to a one semester ad-on. It should be incorporated into the full four year curriculum. I went to Copper Union and we had one great class where you were given the contact info for an actual client. All the clients were non-profits needing something done with no budget and a healthy deadline. They got design work for free (looked after by the professors) and we had an actual job. I did a brochure for the American Numismatic Society and it was a great expierience. But still, it was not a comprehensive business class. I heard Mark Ulriksen give a lecture at one of the Icons, and he said (at least I think it was him) that he would make his students "invoice" each project. They had figure out how much time they really spent on the job, how much money on materials, reference, etc. That's a great idea as well.

Thanks for bringing up this topic. I had a few classes that crossed the curriculum boundaries. One was Advertising Design, the other was Editorial Design. Both classes had an equal number of print design and photography students in them, also with a design and photo professor there to moderate the class. We would be paired up and have to collaborate from concept to finished piece. Everybody was encouraged to get involved in all steps of the process, so the designer should go to the shoot and the photographer should have some say in how their photos were used in the layout. Not only were they some of my most rewarding classes but they were totally fun!

There was also an editorial design/illustration class that I missed out on but from what I heard from other classmates of mine the situation was similar.

In case you were curious I took these courses at the Rochester Institute of Technology (Rochester, NY). My professors had some stories of past classes where one side of the class had become the bully or tyrant and vice versa with another course... I remember they impressed upon us that neither side should have more say than the other. There were some ego clashes now and then but I think it's a worthwhile experience in education. Learn to work together now before there is a contract on the line.